AdNauseam: uBlock Origin fork silently clicking ads on behalf of users • Hacker News Board

Re: AdNauseam: uBlock Origin fork silently clicking ads on behalf of users

#161

Post by brokenmachine » Fri, Aug 25, 2023, 4:32 AM UTC

ac29 wrote: post #97

nradov wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stop being vague. Which specific law do you think that might violate. Provide a citation.

The U.S. Department of Justice Criminal Resource Manual Section 941.18 U.S.C. 1343 cites these as the key elements of wire fraud: “1) that the defendant voluntarily and intentionally devised or participated in a scheme to defraud another out of money; 2) that the defendant did so with the intent to defraud; 3) that it was reasonably foreseeable that interstate wire communications would be used; and 4) that interstate…

Since the ad agencies are the ones benefiting monetarily from this alleged fraud, would that not mean that they would be bringing about a case against themselves?

Re: AdNauseam: uBlock Origin fork silently clicking ads on behalf of users

#162

Post by brokenmachine » Fri, Aug 25, 2023, 4:52 AM UTC

jedberg wrote: post #72

CapsAdmin wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think using the cultural stigma of a "terrorist act" to make an analogy like that isn't very productive. It's as effective as saying "People also do bad things for ideological reasons", simply stating as fact that violating copyright is bad ignoring any of the nuance that was provided.

Violating copyright doesn't actively harm the copyright holder. Clicking on ads consumes actual real world resources of the ad network (which is passed on to the advertiser). This is basically stochastic terrorisim on a small scale.

Attaching unwanted ads and tracking to desired content also consumes actual real world resources for people who don't want ads. Seems to go both ways.

Re: AdNauseam: uBlock Origin fork silently clicking ads on behalf of users

#163

Post by NoZebra120vClip » Sun, Aug 27, 2023, 8:57 AM UTC

memefrog wrote: post #101

brightlancer wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, I like pay-per-use and subscription models. And I'm not entirely opposed to advertising; TV and radio have been ad supported for generations, but we've now added surveillance which is unacceptable. (The ads themselves are also more intrusive, but that's my secondary concern.)

TV ads are okay because you can mute it. Radio ads are obnoxious, always louder than the actual problems.

> always louder than the actual problems

hit the nail on the head with that typo